Many words are being used in contemporary discourses while there is no fixed and constant definition for them. The term "cancel culture" is one of them. Greenwald, in his lecture, criticizes how this term is used and argues that cancel culture does not mean that influential people with prominent positions are criticized more aggressively and vociferously than they're accustomed to being attacked. It implies that powerless people are being sanctioned and punished to the point of destroying their reputations, and their jobs are taken away for transgressing in a minor way. So, as I argued in my previous blog, although cancel culture has a painful history, it is a term whose meaning depends on the person's uses and the social context. This blog follows the previous one, and I want to discuss that some controversial concepts or phenomena that seem not to work in a democratic society might be an option for some voices to be heard in a totalitarian country. I argue how cancel culture forced a company to react to people's protests in Iran recently.
On the 22nd day of street protests in Iran, at around 3 am on Sunday, October 17th, one of the Twitter users published a tweet and claimed that Mihan ice cream trucks had moved oppressor forces in several neighborhoods of Tehran. Since then, this tweet has become so popular that it has finally led to the start of a virtual campaign against the Mihan factory.
In less than 24 hours, the virtual campaign against the Mihan became so widespread that it included numerous cartoons and graphic images along with the hashtag "#Sell_the_Motherland," "# We_do_not_buy_Miahn's product," and "#Sanction_Mihan" all over social networks. It is natural that publishing news like this can arouse public anger on such days. Previously, pictures of ambulances that were moving oppressor forces were posted. This has led many cyberspace users to conclude that a similar action by Mihen's car-refrigerators is not too far from imagination.
It is essential to mention that in a hegemonic system when people criticize those in power's behavior or a company's policies, they don't react as if nothing has happened. In this case, like previous cases in Iran, Mihan company did not respond to this campaign; however, after a while, when they saw they were being canceled and no one bought their products, they had to react and published a statement:
"Mihan Industrial Group, as an entrepreneurial group, owes everything to the grace of God, the efforts of its colleagues, and the excellent choice of dear people and compatriots who have trusted in the products and achievements of this group for five decades.
Now unscrupulously false proportions, without any documents, proofs, and even a photo! It has been published on some social networks, which is wholly denied.
This is where it is necessary to emphasize our covenant once again, "Mihan for people in our homeland"; And let us declare that we are trying with every bit of our being to realize this fundamental motto of the group. The industrial Mihan group always considers itself to be at the service of the people."
In their statement, they deny their help to the oppressor forces, and they do not go further, so many people do not find their argument persuasive, but it is essential that at least they were forced to react. I do not want to discuss the result as it is still an ongoing debate. However, fear of canceling their products forced them to respond, and how to cancel culture can be a tool for people to be heard in totalitarian societies.
In Iran, there is no structure for democracy, and "cancel culture" has always been used by the government to shut down the establishment of democratic ideas and institutions. There are many people ranging from Haft Tappeh workers to artists like Abtin Baktash, who have been canceled and even killed by the government because they were not governments supporter. But during this recent protest, people are using the same strategy to remove the Islamic republic first and then those who disagree with the idea of canceling the whole Islamic Republic. The A Letter on Justice and Open Debate mentions that "resistance must not be allowed to harden into its own brand of dogma or coercion—which right-wing demagogues are already exploiting. The democratic inclusion we want can be achieved only if we speak out against the intolerant climate that has set in on all sides". The content of this letter seems very reasonable to everyone, but as we discussed in class, it is just valid on the paper and theory. When it comes to practice, it does not work, or at least in a totalitarian society, I would claim that it does not work at all, as I have been witnessing during my life that where there is no democratic structure and as I argued in Mihan case, people have to use the same strategy as oppression system uses, to force them to hear their voice. You have to talk in their language if you want them to listen to you. To sum up, in a totalitarian society, the culture functions in a totally different way compared to a democratic society.
Resources:
“A Letter on Justice and Open Debate,” Posted on July 7, 2020
Greenwald, Glenn. “Elites are Distorting the “Cancel Culture” Crisis,” System Update,
Published on July 17, 2020.
Wow, Marzi! I really liked how you applied cancel culture outside of the U.S. and into your home country. In Iran, it's clear that "cancelling" (censorship, coercion) have been government tactics to control and maintain power. In turn, citizens must turn to those same strategies to leverage power. In the past here in the U.S., boycotting has a long history in the U.S., it is mostly tied to social issues, rather than putting direct pressure on the government or systems that uphold the government. I think of boycotts against Ben and Jerry's, Netflix, Nike are examples of recent socially charged boycotts. The most famous boycott was the Montgomery Bus Boycott in Alabama during the Civil Rights Movement, which was one…
It’s a great thing that you brought a case study from Iran, and we can see that not only people get cancelled but a whole company. It’s funny when I read that at first the company didn’t react to the cancellation until they saw that their product wasn’t selling. “Go Capitalism!”. I really like how you distinguish the difference of cancel culture in a different type of government. I’m not fully aware or familiar of the types of government but what I can understand is that Cancel culture is a complicated concept to understand . And yes in some cases it helps but also has caused harm. Thank you and Great job, Marzi!